Peasah v. C&S Value Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Peasah v. C&S Value Stores, Inc.

306 A.D.2d 14, 759 N.Y.S.2d 657, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6178

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 3, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 306 A.D.2d 14 (Peasah v. C&S Value Stores, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peasah v. C&S Value Stores, Inc., 306 A.D.2d 14, 759 N.Y.S.2d 657, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6178 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered April 1, 2002, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries as a result of a slip and fall on snow and ice located on the sidewalk in front of defendant’s premises. Although there is some conflicting testimony, including a sworn affidavit of plaintiff and an eyewitness account, as to whether plaintiff fell in front of defendant’s premises, there is also testimony that defendant’s employees undertook to remove snow and ice from the alleged site of the subject incident. While it is well settled that a property owner does not bear the responsibility of removing snow and ice from the public sidewalk, once the property owner undertakes that task, he or she must do so with reasonable care (see Velazquez v Pereira, 257 AD2d 432 [1999]; Glick v City of New York, 139 AD2d 402 [1988]). In light of the foregoing, questions of material fact exist as to the actual situs of the occurrence as well as the nature and extent of defendant’s snow and ice removal from the subject sidewalk, thereby precluding summary relief (see Santiago v New York City Hous. Auth., 274 AD2d 335 [2000]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered April 1, 2002, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries as a result of a slip and fall on snow and ice located on the sidewalk in front of defendant’s premises. Although there is some conflicting testimony, including a sworn affidavit of plaintiff and an eyewitness account, as to whether plaintiff fell in front of defendant’s premises, there is also testimony that defendant’s employees undertook to remove snow and ice from the alleged site of the subject incident. While it is well settled that a property owner does not bear the responsibility of removing snow and ice from the public sidewalk, once the property owner undertakes that task, he or she must do so with reasonable care (see Velazquez v Pereira, 257 AD2d 432 [1999]; Glick v City of New York, 139 AD2d 402 [1988]). In light of the foregoing, questions of material fact exist as to the actual situs of the occurrence as well as the nature and extent of defendant’s snow and ice removal from the subject sidewalk, thereby precluding summary relief (see Santiago v New York City Hous. Auth., 274 AD2d 335 [2000]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 A.D.2d 14, 759 N.Y.S.2d 657, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peasah-v-cs-value-stores-inc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack